itcrowd

41 ms·

361.
by itcrowd 7y ago
> one of the key issue with the Chrome store is that it allows extensions with ability to execute remote code in extension context I agree. It is also "strongly recommended against" by the dev page [1]. Do you know a strong arg
362.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Good question. A good but short answer is given on Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matched_filter#Matched_filter_... ). Any undergraduate textbook on digital signal processing should have details on this topic.
363.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Ah, ethics. Here's my opinion. No literature this time [happy] To keep in your cited "flying blind" analogy: I don't think we're flying blind. I think we have a good understanding of the dominant mechanisms that co
364.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Thanks danielst for the kind words. Huge respect for your civil responses. That said. I did a bit of a deep-dive into the literature and may need to somewhat revise my stance. First, let me try to summarize our common ground and our differe
365.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Indeed, the radiation coming from the sun in the visible spectrum is much larger than the microwave radiation coming off it [1]. Note: the microwave spectrum ends at ~300 GHz or 1 mm wavelength, that is 1 million nanometers, so the scale on
366.
by itcrowd 7y ago
I've addressed the Lancet Planetary Health study here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20454375#20457998 The Guardian article cites Henry Lai, but I could not find his paper (was it published at all?). It also cit
367.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Since I cannot edit my other posts anymore, I thought I'd leave some references here for those that are interesting in reading. [1] High-level overview. The applications are somewhat outdated w.r.t. 5G (2003) [2] Literature review of p
368.
by itcrowd 7y ago
I don't like the approach of questioning credentials. It would be more useful, in my opinion, to demonstrate the factual incorrectness of the blogpost by investigating its (scientific) sources. See where the information comes from and
369.
by itcrowd 7y ago
> higher bands of 5G cannot even penetrate the human skin True > this means that the human skin effectively absorbs all the energy that reaches it False. Most power is reflected directly off the skin. The tiny amount of power that is
370.
by itcrowd 7y ago
> The Lancet, from what I understand, is a pretty respectable journal Again, it's complicated. The Lancet is the name of a (good!) general medical journal, but there are also topics that are discussed in specialized sub-journals. Th
371.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Yeah, the study is widely criticized. Ars Technica gave a nice breakdown of it here: https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/draft-of-us-governme... > To sum up the findings: a bunch of cancers that aren&#
372.
by itcrowd 7y ago
I don't know about incidence rates (source?) but obviously lab equipment is more dangerous than a consumer product. I don't understand what point you're trying to make.
373.
by itcrowd 7y ago
I agree with that! Thanks for the linked dissertation. I will take some time to read it soon.
374.
by itcrowd 7y ago
AT&T brands it as "5GE" but it has nothing to do with 5G. See also "AT&T Misrepresentation of network technology": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility#Misrepresentat...
375.
by itcrowd 7y ago
No, that is inaccurate. See my other post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20454375#20454974
376.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Look, I don't disagree with most things you say. However, especially in modern times with all academic papers being so easily accessible to anyone with an internet connection, the argument of "believ[ing] the good word of $GIANT_T
377.
by itcrowd 7y ago
So, on the one hand we need to "prove safety" of $NEW_TECH before deployment and on the other hand the $NEW_TECH industry is not allowed to fund the investigation (because suspicious!!)? How does anything new get invented in that
378.
by itcrowd 7y ago
The fact that 5G is not commercially available does not mean there have been no studies. A quick Google Scholar (or whatever) search could have cleared that up for you. Here's the link to save you from typing it in: https://
379.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Thanks. Here are my comments as I read all 3 parts: Part 1: Re-iterates what I've said in this thread before. No safety concerns. Correctly cites scientific sources to back up claims. Part 2: Citation [1] referenced in blog is not cons
380.
by itcrowd 7y ago
The linked source doesn't contain the word "5G" but it talks about radiation from 30 kilohertz to 300 gigahertz (30 kHz - 300 GHz). This encompasses 5G by a very large margin. The article makes the following conclusion about
381.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Researchers are quite confident that 5G is safe because besides heating and ionization (see my other post in this thread), there is no known mechanism by which it could be harmful. I know, you cited Wikipedia and that has scientific referen
382.
by itcrowd 7y ago
These satellites employ what are known as passive radiometers: devices that detect how much radiation is present in a specific frequency band. This radiation comes from water molecules in the atmosphere. The problem is that 5G might emit in
383.
by itcrowd 7y ago
The short answer is no. The long answer is that according to Table 1 of your source, there are four frequencies that affect VGCC: 1) Static fields (i.e. DC, 0 Hz) 2) 50/60 Hz (wall-socket frequency) 3) 700-1100 MHz (cell-phone frequenc
384.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Let me try to clear it up. (sorry, it got a bit long) First, the skin (and skull and clothing .. etc.) does act as a barrier, which is why the graph that is shown in the article is flawed (this is mentioned). It shows absorption of microwav
385.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Could you provide some links to the articles that say "this is definitely something to worry about"? edit: I'll start with some counter-evidence concluding it's safe. A literature review of millimeter-wave radiation safe
386.
by itcrowd 7y ago
What I can't understand is why people are so prone to believing the fake facts that make the rounds on the internet. It is so easy to debunk them, and anyone who has studied the topic for any amount of time knows they are false. Is the
387.
by itcrowd 7y ago
Not sure. I looked up what Paul Graham had to say on the subject: > If you work your way down the Forbes 400 making an x next to the name of each person with an MBA, you'll learn something important about business school. After Warr
388.
by itcrowd 7y ago
The linked article is a little short. Here are some extra links with some more information. Original press release: https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intels-pohoiki-beach-64-chip... Arstechnica article: https:/&#x2
389.
by itcrowd 7y ago
True. And I don't want to be overly pedantic with the implementation details. I like your proposal to remove passwords and prevent phising in general and I'm trying to give some honest feedback on what I think is wrong with this
390.
by itcrowd 7y ago
> for stolen email credentials [...] an attacker is going to [...] [reset] all your passwords to important services I agree. You are saving them the effort of taking this step.

More ›